Auraria Membership

Introduction
This thesis preparation report provides the guidelines and framework for programming, planning and design of a passenger terminal complex and support facilities to be located at Montrose County Airport Montrose, Colorado. Based on all available data, the following analysis' is designed to furnish the best possible answers to the visible needs of the present and the anticipated needs of the future.
environmental design
auraria library
1
Date Due

*r
"~~ "
T T T T T T
-4+
^ ^ srspf~T
*>-
BACKROUND

Objectives and Scope
The design and planning of this facility requires the recognition of the fact that the passenger terminal is part of a system in which all components contribute to the overall level of aviation activity. Given this, this report is defined in terms of the following objectives:
A) Background excerpts from Montrose county Airport Master Flan
(see following pages;
B) To discuss passenger terminal requirements anticipated by this project
C) 10 determine site location with respect to p acticality, economics, aircraft activity, surrounding Land and community uses
D) Show the future air travel demands generated by Montrose County and surrounding areas
E) Provide a development schedule for implementing phased building construe tion

THE AIRPORT AND THE MONTROSE ECONOMY
Until 1963, the City of Montrose was isolated in the Uncompahgre Valley with egress and ingress difficult and time-consuming especially in the winter months. Highway 50 East and North, 550 South and 1-70 to the east and west were the major surface corridors available to any person wishing to travel to and from Montrose. Fortunately for the City, Frontier Airlines began scheduled airline service in 1963, and 4,584 people used the service that year.
Between 1963 and 1970, airport boardings increased from 4,584 to 6,054 an increase of 32%. During the same period, the City population increased from 5,044 to 6,096, or 29%, making Montrose the fastest growing County Seat on the Western Slope. As can be seen, growth in population and airport boardings paralleled closely, 32% and 29%, in the seven years between 1963 and 1970.
However, this growth parallel did not hold true between 1970 and.1977. While the population increased from 6,496 to 8,850 or 36%, the airport boardings increased from 6,054 to 17,572, an increase of 190%, almost six times as fast as the City population growth.
Why has this occured? Several reasons come to mind.
1) People in Montrose are flying more often;
2) More business is being conducted with Denver or other areas;
3) Our trade area i.e. people from throughout the area use the Montrose airport;
4) Government offices Department of Energy, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, etc.
5) Corporate offices Colorado Ute
6) Tourism Telluride Ski Area
Whatever the reason you may pick, one can say that the airport is inexorably linked to our economy.
Now, let's examine the future for a moment. Most projections put the City popultion at between 11,600 to 12,500 by 1985. If airport boardings increase at the same rate (5.3%) as the City between 1970 and 1977, the airport boardings in 1985 will be approximately 26,561. However, if growth in airport boardings do not parallel population growth but. continue to grow at their historic rate (27%), boardings in 1985 will be 98,637 5.6 times the present number. This raises

several questions about the growth.of the airport.
1) Two airlines the increase in boardings during the last 7
/
years indicates the need for more daily flights which can be achieved in two ways:
(a) more flights by existing airlines; and
(b) two or more airlines.
Both alternatives are taking place with Frontier adding another Denver flight and Aspen adding 3 more flights daily. Two airlines /ill not only give the passengers greater flight choice but may ilso lead to lower prices through competition.
2) Jet Service Do we want jet service? The advantages are faster flights in more comfort. Disadvantages are a possible red\iction in number of flights due to larger aircraft capacity and increased noise over the city.
3) Catering to corporate aircraft. If we want to bring more corporate headquarters to the City, we need to offer facilities for their aircraft. The possibility of more corporate offices in Montrose exists especially because of energy development
in our service area.
4) Tourism. Tourism in Montrose and its outlying areas has been a major business for many years. Due to impending energy shortages, the airport facility becomes even more crucial.
We need more flights, larger aircraft and better facilities.
5) Western Flights. Currently, a resident in Montrose can only fly east to catch Denver connecting flights to the west. Do we need direct flights to the west? This may entail another airline.
6) Trade Area. The airport is crucial not only to the City but to all areas and cities it serves. For example, the Telluride ski area will continue to grow and air service to Montrose is critical to its continued growth.

7) Is airport growth in lino with the City of Montrose other growth policies? Policies such as line extension, urban service area, sewage and water treatment plants, and industrial promotion. The City will grow and the airport is a critical cog in the City's future growth and community development process. Our options are to continue to upgrade the facility or stagnate and lose boardings and dollars to Grand Junction.
te: Conservation with Gerald Hickman, President of Aspen Airlines,
April 14, 1978.
I asked Mr. Hickman why Aspen Airlines service to Montrose was delayed past the proposed April 10, 1978 date. He stated that the Montrose Airport authority had not approved any of Aspen Airlines three proposals for passenger facilities. Until the facility is approved by the Airport Authority, Aspen cannot begin service because of Civil Aeronautics Board reguktions dealing with passenger facilities.

MONTROSE COUNTY AIRPORT INTERIM AIRPORT MASTER PLAN SUMMARY REPORT
I. BACKGROUND
An Airport Master Plan for the Montrose County Airport was prepared in 1S75 that recommended long range improvements to the existing airport based on socioeconomic and aviation trends through 1974. The plan called for development of a new terminal complex, expanded general aviation facilities, a new emergency /maintenance building and equipment and other support facilities. In addition, it was recommended that 175 acres be'acquired for runway extension and clear zone protection. The main Runway 12/30 was to be retained and enlarged to 150 feet wide by 10,000 feet in length (100 feet x 8,500 feet existing). Frontier Airlines took the position that passenger boardings through 1974 did not support service to Montrose by larger aircraft (i.e. B-737). Therefore, the runway pavement and grading design was to conform to Convair 580 and executive jet aircraft usage based on the stated intentions of Frontier (March 10, 1975) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) design criteria.
Since that time passenger enplanements have increased from 12,570 in 1974 to 25,951 in 1978, an average increase of 27 percent per year. In May, 1978, Aspen Airways began scheduled service to Montrose which contributed to an overall increase in total air carrier operations (takeoffs and landings) by 70 percent in one year. This increased service resulted in a 50 percent increase in passenger enplanements between 1977 and 1978 placing new demands on an already undersized terminal building. Since the number of passengers per flight (load factor) has remained high, it has now become apparent that the Montrose air carrier market is growing faster than had been anticipated by the airlines and the 1975 Master Plan.
-1-

As a result, Frontier notified the county (August 30, 1977) that it would like to begin B-737 jet service to Montrose once a jet capable runway is available. Besides the increase in air carrier activity, general aviation (G/A) has grown at a faster pace than projected. Over the last five years G/A traffic has increased by 37 percent reaching an estimated 32,000 operations in 1978. Overall, total annual operations have increased from 28,900 in 1973 to 49,500 in 1978, a 71 percent increase.
The previous Airport Master Plan determined that land use compatibility, noise and public safety v/ere principal concerns of Montrose area residents. Approaches and/or departures over town were, and still are, undesirable. The prospects of jet service intensify these concerns to many who pose the logical question, "Why spend more money at an airport with homes and a hospital under the approach to Runway 30.?" Others maintain that the ease and convenience of the present location, centralized within the region, and the capital investment to date, makes its continued use the only realistic choice. In order to accommodate both opinions, the airport management lias emphasized the use of Runway 12 for both landings and takeoffs. With prevailing winds from the south, this has been satisfactory for approaches, but has placed capacity and safety limitations on the airport during takeoffs under strong southerly winds.
Land use and noise compatibility, limiting runway utilization, prospects of jet service and recent growth in airport activity, have all combined to pose serious questions to the airport. Therefore, the Montrose County Airport Authority in conjunction with the Federal Aviation Administration has undertaken efforts to update the 1975 Master Plan in order to address these issues.
-2-

II. AJ.R TRAFFIC FORECASTS
The area served by the Montrose County Airport includes the cities of Montrose and Delta, Montrose County and portions of Ouray, San Miguel and Delta Counties. Socioeconomic indicators reveal that the service area has experienced significant growth in the past 20 years. The Montrose region is growing for many reasons, including: a healthy economy based on agriculture, industry and urban services; tourism and recreational opportunities and the assets of being a commercial center within western Colorado. Since transportation is a fundamental requirement for continued uniform community growth, the airport is expected to continue to respond with an increasing level of aviation activity.
Total aircraft activity is projected to increase from an estimated 1978 level of 49,500 operations to 111,000 operations in 1998 as depicted in Figure A. Most of this growth is expected to occur in the G/A category. However, much of the development needed over the next 20 years is aimed at improving the overall facility to accommodate not only the needs of G/A users but also demands generated by improved Air Carrier service.
IIL PHASED DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES AND COSTS
The principal goal of the current Master Planning effort is to identify all feasible alternatives available to the County in response to increasing aviation demand. The intent is to not only provide a safe facility which meets the long-range transportation needs of the community but also evaluate possible means to cost-effectively avoid the noise and land use conflicts previously cited.
Four such alternatives have been identified and are described as follows:
-3

/
A. Existing Site Runway 12/30 Strengthening, Extension and Widening
This alternative would develop facilities along the line's of the previous Master Planning Study with the exception of jet capable facilities and accelerated terminal development. As outlined in Table I, one runway would serve all aviation for the initial five year period (Phase I). A second crosswind runway would not be available until late in Phase II (5-10 years). The present runway would be reconstructed, strengthened, widened and extended to 10,000 feet by 150 feet. Runway 12 would have the Instrument Landing System (ILS) precision approach so that the airport would continue to be operated with both approaches and departures from and to the northwest as much as possible. The terminal complex, G/A facilities and other building areas would remain similar to the previous Master Plan recommendations. In order to have a uniform comparison of alternatives and provide crosswind coverage, a General Transport- runway (capable of handling aircraft through the CV-580) has been included in this concept. This alternative is depicted in Exhibit I and would not provide a two-runway airfield system until the latter half of the 20 year development period. At that time the combined two-runway wind coverage would equal 98.5 percent for all aircraft except the B-737. Wind coverage for air carrier jets would correspond to Runway 12/30 coverage of 96.6 percent.
The combination of seasonal soil expansion and contraction, and trapped water beneath paved surfaces has caused the present runway to require extensive maintenance. In order to construct new facilities at the existing site engineering designs will have to include the use of selected fill materials including rock and gravel in order to allow percolation of moisture away from paved surfaces and the use of full depth asphalt pavement design to give paved surfaces inherent strength to compensate for a less than ideal soil foundation.
FAA design designation
-5-

With potential impacts to wildlife, aquatic life, vegetation, air quality, aesthetics and places of community interest all appearing to be manageable, noise, land use compatibility, convenience and development costs remain the key issues in this investigation. Development of this alternative requires acquisition of approximately 450 acres and the relocation of 15 homes within the future clear zone. There are eight additional structures which would have to be removed to allow for runway construction and clear zone protection.
The approaeh/departure zones for Runway 12/30 affects residential housing and zoning off both runway ends. The Runway 30 approach is over town and overlays 441 total acres of residential and hospital land uses. Runway 12 affects an additional 276 acres of residentially zoned land of which less than ten percent is currently developed. Exhibit I also displays a noise contour projected for 1998 aviation activity. Alternative A would result in 124 acres of noise impacted residential zoning outside the future airport property line. Within this Composite Noise Rating (100-CNR) contour, noise exposure could result in vigorous citizen complaints including possible group action.
Table I summarizes the improvement items that are anticipated during the 20 year planning period. The total estimated development cost is $25,191,000 based on 1978 construction costs. According to current FAA capital grant policy regarding improvement item eligibility for federal participation, approximately 72 percent of this development program would be eligible for federal participation with the balance ($7,126,000) being the local 20 year funding requirement.
B. Existing Site Construction of New Runway 17/35
This alternative would provide a two-runway airfield configuration during the first five year period (Phase I) by adding a jet runway adjacent to existing airfield facilities. The building area facilities remain comparable to the precceding alternative, however air carrier operations would not overfly the
-7-

City of Montrose. Land needed for this alternative (470 + acres) is presently used as irrigated cropland and includes four homes and 12 other buildings. A new main Runway 17/35 would be constructed from: a point adjacent to the new terminal location extending across Cedar Creek, an irrigation ditch, Juniper Road, and the proposed alignment of the U.S. 50 bypass. The required runway length is 10,000 feet by 150 feet in width (Exhibit II). To accommodate the ILS localizer this new runway would start from a point 1,000 feet north of Runway 12/30 and provide air carrier wind coverage of 97.8 percent. Runway 12/30 would be used for general aircraft operations and CV-580 traffic under crosswind conditions. The combined wind coverage would be 98.5 percent with the difference between this and the preceding alternative being the increased air carrier jet coverage with this configuration.
The ILS precision approach would be from the northwest (Runway 17) which does not affect land used or zoned for residential or other non-compatible uses. Departures to the south (Runway 35) would affect 240 acres of residential^ zoned but essentially undeveloped land south of the Uneompahgre RiverThe land within the 1998 Composite Noise Rating (1C0-CNR) contour would be acquired in conjunction with development of the new runway with the exception of 148 acres off both runway ends. Zoning in these areas is limited to agriculture and light industrial, both considered compatible with airport activity. Air carrier traffic on Runway 17/35 along with a combination of avigation easements, rezoning, and fee simple purchase, would result in compatible land use and noise conditions. As in the case of the first alternative, continued development at this site will require special design and construction techniques to compensate for poor area soils. Table I summarizes the development items projected for the 20 year planning period, estimated to cost 2/
$23,198,000 of which 77 percent is currently eligible for federal participation. This would require local funding of an estimated $5,406,000 over the 20 year period.
An existing mobile home park in this vicinity would not be under the
approach/dcparture corridor.
2/
Based on 1978 construction cos.ts.
-8-

Definitions and R quirements
The major functional areas this design concerns itself with are:
1) Curb rtrea the sidewalk area for arriving and departing
passengers, visitors and baggage to enter and exit from terminal
2.) Terrains1 Area the area for passengers and baggage to be
processed for the aircraft arrivals and departures. ihe Montrose terminal will be composed of the following areas:
- Airline Ticket Counter/Office: the area for ticketing and baggage check-in
- Terminal Services: the area for essential rvices, concessions and amenities for passengers and visitors
- Outbound Baggage: the non-public area for sorting and processing baggage transferred from one flight to another
- Lobby: the area for waiting and circulation
- Intra-Airline and Interline Baggage: the area for nrocessing baggage transferred from one flight to another
- Inbound Baggage: the area for receiving baggage from ai arriving flight and displaying same for claim by passenger
- Airport Administration and Services: the non-public area for airport management operations and maintenance functions
3) Connector the element that joins the terminal to the parked aircraft. The connector may be composed of the following elements:
- Concourse: the area for circulation to and between departure lounges
- Departure Lounge: the area used for assembling passengers for a flight departure
- Passenger Boarding Device: the cfevice used to enplane and
deplane passengers

- Airline Operations: the area for airline operations personnel and equipment
Apron the area for the aircraft gate position and for all of the events and activities pertaining to operations at the aircraft gate positions.
The apron may include the following areas:
- Aircraft Gate Position: the area for the aircraft and ground-service equipment
- Aircraft Services: the area for aircraft ground service equipment around the aircraft
- Anron Baggage and Freight Service: the area for staging and loading aircraft baggage freight and mail

Public facilities in the terminal services category may include the following:
Restrooms
Restaurant
Cafeteria
Coffee and snack shop Gift shop Cocktail lounge Newsstands Pharmacy
Insurance sales Duty-free shops Banking
Barber sbop/beauty salon Shoeshine concession Post office Public telephones Public lockers Public observation area Nursery First aid
U.S.O travelers aid Currency exchange
The nonpublic facilities in the terminal services category may include the following:
Airport administration Concession storage Employee locker rooms Cafeteria and/or lunchrooms Food-preparation areas Employee restrooms Maintenance workshops First aid
Refuse-disposal areas Police and airport security FAA and weather bureau facilities Mail facilities
A. Terminal Services Public Facilities
The planning of public facilities is dependent upon the forecast demand, passenger volumes, and individual airport traffic characteristics. Essential services, such as restrooms, may be planned on the basis of occupancy ratios that require minimum accommodations These ratios may be established by he municipality, airport, or other authorities. Minimum standard requirements for special considerations are also specified, as in the case of providing or the handicapped in terminals.
Amenities are planned to a great extent based upon a marketing analysis and/or preferences indicated by past experience and judgment. The accessibility and accommodations for these facilities must be arranged so that maximum exposure to the passenger and visitor can be accomplished without interfering with the flow in the essential corridors of pedestrian traffic in the terminal. The plan of the lobby and the terminal services areas must be thoroughly considered in terms of the traffic patterns and queues that may develop in the vicinity of the amenities.
B. Terminal Services Nonpublic Areas
The nonpublic employee areas of the terminal should be sized according to the number of pers an-nel to be accommodated and to prevailing regulations or codes. Standards are usually established beyond the minimum requirements, and may also be affected by local labor/management agreements.
Staff and manning requirements may vary significantly for every airport. The airline manning requirements are established by the individual airlines: they are obtained from the US. domestic carriers through forms issued by the ATA and, for foreign international carriers, by standard International Air Transport Association (IATA) forms. Airport policy may require the airport staff to be located in the terminal and, to a certain degree, the same is true for concessionaire personnel.
Planning of the support areas for the public terminal service may include a degree of centralization for such areas as the food-preparation areas, where a main kitchen may serve and support a number of service kitchens in the restaurant, coffee shop, snack shops, and the cocktail lounges Refuse-disposal areas should also be planned to benefit from service-corridor arrangements and container systems.
Utility requirements may be substantial for the terminal facility and its services. Therefore, a degree of efficiency can be achieved by concentrating the major fixed-service areas utility distribution centers. Expansion capability should be built in for additions or expansion to services. A consistent location for services will also, to some extent, enable the passenger to find these services readily.
6-9

6.2.5. OUTBOUND BAGGAGE AREA
The outbound baggage area is the point to which baggage from the curb and ATO is conveyed, usually by a mechanical device. In this area, it is sorted and loaded into baggage containers or carts for delivery to the aircraft for loading.
An individual airline usually processes its own baggage for flights, although sharing of spaces and devices may occur and must be considered for each concept In most cases, sorting and loading areas are individually used, whereas cart drives are often used in common.
Operations differ from airline to airline, but the activity is approximately the same for each. In most existing situations, personnel scan baggage tags for the flight designation, remove the baggage from the device. and place it in a container or cart.
Figures 6-6 arid 6-7 show two types of outbound baggage areas The first (Figure 6-6) shows a simple conveyor belt with containers on dollies parked adjacent to the belt. Enough space is left between the device and the container to allow baggage personnel to circulate and work at the device and around the containers Lanes for maneuvering and passing may be as shown, or may be along both ends of the parking and loading area.
Figure 6-7 shows a baggage-sorting device around which the baggage containers or baggage carts are parked. Similar clearances are observed for the personnel as in Figure 6-6. The device is a circulating (racetrack) type; baggage is fed from one or more sources (usually conveyors) onto the racetrack. The circulating feature allows for storage of the baggage until the personnel can remove the bag for loading. The conveyor-belt feeders shown are elevated to allow for passage of vehicles. The use of feeder belts allows more than one airline to use the device.
More sophisticated baggage-handling systems may be required to prevent serious congestion and delays in terminals with large volumes of passengers forecast. Most of these systems will be designed for large, high-capacity airports. Terminal designs should allow for the future installation of such systems where appropriate.
6.2.6 PLANNING THE OUTBOUND BAGGAGE AREA
Processing times in the outbound baggage facility are critical in that the sequence of events leading to the departure of the aircraft is dependent upon closely coordinated activity, including the time necessary to receive, sort, load, and transfer baggage aboard the aircraft. Circuitous bag routes to the sort and load point in the outbound facility will necessitate unreasonable "close-out times for the passenger with baggage to check in. (Close-out time, in this instance, is defined as the last possible opportunity for the passenger to check in baggage at the ATO or at the curb and be assured that the baggage will be placed aboard the aircraft.) Expensive material-handling devices that may be necessary to negotiate the complex routing should be traded off against other considerations and alternatives.
Other problems may occur in existing facilities and, in some cases, in new facilities. One problem is low clear height resulting from structural or mechanical systems. This is critical for the B-747, L-1011, and DC-10 containers, whose minimum ceiling height for transport is 8 ft, 6 in. and, for handling and loading, is 10 ft Another problem is closely spaced columns; containers cannot be maneuvered in train (see Figure 6-6) because the minimum turning radii of two wide-body aircraft containers in train can be as much as 30 ft.
Because internal-combustion engine vehicles are used for towing carts and container dollies, the requirements for ventilating the baggage area, if fully or partially enclosed, are essential These requirements can be stringent because of local building or industrial safety codes.
6.2.7 INBOUND BAGGAGE AREA
The inbound baggage area is more commonly referred to as the baggage claim area. It is divided into two areaspublic and nonpublic. The public area is the area at which the passenger and visitor have access to the baggage displayed for recognition and claiming. The nonpublic area is the area at which the airline baggage service personnel offload the baggage from aircraft baggage containers or carts onto the claim device.
Three figures are shown giving examples of three types of inbound baggage facilities: the simple shelf, the carrousel, and the circulating type Other
6-10

Figure 6-6 Outbound Baggage, Belt System
6-11

^ CONCOURSE
c> t>
Figure 6-11 Example of a Departure Lounge

6.3.3. AIRLINE OPERATIONS AREA
The Operations Area (OPS) is the designation frequently given to the area occupied by airline personnel for performing the functions related to handling the aircraft while it is on the ground in preparation for departure. Therefore, OPS is usually located near the apron. Normally, OPS is composed of the area required for the flight crew and flight attendants and the required area for airline personnel assigned to ground service operations
The area for flight crew and tiight attendants may consist of lounge(s); storage space for flight-kit bags, coats, and baggage; an area for flight planning, weather, and flight information; restrooms; stewardess grooming area; and vending-machine area. The above-mentioned areas may not always be present in every airport. However, depending upon the number of flights per day and the type of aircraft (an aircraft crew may have as many as 15 crew members), the size and complexity of these facilities will be more or less as described above. Specific planning information can be obtained from the ATA Planning Questionnaires mentioned previously.
The area for ground-service personnel may consist of areas for cabin service personnel and storage; aircraft line maintenance personnel and storage, including a small work area; a facilities maintenance area for sanitation and janitorial personnel and storage; an area for ground-service equipment maintenance personnel storage; and a shop. Some of these areas may not be needed immediately in the vicinity of the aircraft parked position. Again, depending upon the frequency and size of the operation, the number of areas may be more or less as described above. Usually, equipment maintenance shops' are not required at the aircraft gate position. Administrative and storage areas can be combined, and only those essential items that are usually required immediately and cannot be obtained from a more remote location need to be stored at the gate position. Secure storage areas may be required for those items that are considered fragile or valuable. Areas for storage of volatiles may also be required, properly equipped with all of the safeguards necessary to protect personnel and the facility. Planning information for these areas is also available from the ATA Planning Questionnaires submitted by the airlines requiring the space.
The forecast information on area requirements for these areas is usually general. The exact amount
of area required vs area produced is a function of planning the facility so that the most economical planning solution results. Later stages of the design process, in combination with airline consultation, should produce the best solution for determining the needs of the airline, as well as making accommodations for future requirements. It has been the experience of the past that, beyond initial provision of OPS, the requirement for expansion will not be much greater than the area initially provided
6.3.4 LOADING DEVICES
There are three options (Figure 6-12) for transferring passengers between the connector and the aircraft;
(1) Stairs
Integral aircraft stair
Mobile passenger stair
(2) Loading bridges
Ramp drive
Fixed
(3) Transporters
Non-elevating
Elevating
Stairs are used in cases where aircraft boarding is from apron level. This situation is usually associated with departure lounges at ground level rather than at second level. Mobile passenger stairs are adjustable within a certain range to various aircraft sill heights; integral aircraft stairs are built into the aircraft.
Loading bridges, on the other hand, are associated primarily with a second-level boarding operation. Departure lounges are usually situatdd at second level, although in some cases a ramp or stair to the loading bridge provides a connection between an apron-level departure lounge and a loading bridge. Apron-level loading bridges are also available. Ramp-drive bridges are capable of adjustment to various aircraft sill heights, and usually can be extended or retracted. The built-in flexibility inherent in ramp-drive loading bridges provides the option of serving combinations of small or large aircraft. Fixed loading bridges are usually capable of serving only one or two types of aircraft because of their limited flexibility, although they are capable of minor height adjustment. Transporter vehicles are used when aircraft are parked remote from the terminal.
6-17

Figure 6-13 indicates aircraft sill-height relationships'^ loading devices.
6.4 APRON
The paragraphs that follow are concerned with those portions of the apron that are designated as (1) the aircraft gate position area and (2) areas 'or aircraft services and apron baggage service.
6.4.1 AIRCRAFT GATE POSITION AREA
The aircraft gate position area is the area for the aircraft, ground-service equipment, and passenger-loading device. A number of areas can be identified that will usually constitute the -nvelope around the aircraft gate position. These asaas include the area required for the maneuver nq aircraft; the area for minimum safe clearance to other aircraft, at rest or in motion; clearance' ::o buildings or other obstructions; the area for passenger movement on the apron (whether or not the passenger is actually on the apron) or for the area taken up by the boarding device, an area for aircraft service equipment; an area for minimizing jet-blast effect; and the area taken up by the aircraft. Figure 6-14 shows a DC-10/L-1011 type aircraft and an example of the areas, outlined and superimposed, that have been mentioned above. Figure 6-15 shows the individual areas as shaded in separate diagrams labeled a through e.
Figure 6-15a shows the area required for a maneuvering aircraft; in this case, it is the area shown to the sides of the wingtips, extending forward of the aircraft around the engine nacelles, and forward to the building line. Because the aircraft, in this case, would be approaching 90 degrees to the building line, only the area just described would be required for clearance.
Figure 6-15b shows the area for minimum safe clearance to other aircraft; in this case, it would be the area around the wingtips and a rectangular area aft of the aircraft. The latter area would be maintained for other taxiing aircraft in relation to the parked aircraft.
Figure 6-15c shows the area required for minimum safe clearance to buildings; in this case, it would be the area forward of the nose of the fuselage It is a small area because only the nose of the fuselage approaches the building.
Figure 6-15d shows the area for passenger movement on the apron; in this case, it is the area extending from the building line to the left side of the aircraft and bending 90 degrees to extend to the No. 2 door of the aircraft. This area would accommodate a loading-bridge boarding device. To a great extent, this area would be free under the loading bridge, except for any fixed ground-service equipment and the supporting structure of the loading bridge.
Figure 6-15e shows the area for ground-service equipment. This is the area required for the equipment when it is staged or arranged at the various service points around the aircraft. Figure 6-16 gives an example of such an arrangement for all of the ground equipment in a situation where a loading-bridge boarding device is used. For access to the service points of the aircraft, almost all of the other areas are used by personnel and equipment at some time during the operation, as indicated in Figure 6-17, which shows the important station positions.
An area for minimizing jet-blast effect does not apply in this case because the aircraft is applying power only during the breakaway maneuver after being pushed to the apron taxilane The jet blast in such a case is assumed to be directed on the taxilane ana not at the aircraft parked position The second example of an aircraft gate position is a B-727 aircraft (Figure 6-18) in a taxi-in, taxi-out, parallel-parked position. That is, the aircraft fuselage is parallel to the building line, and the aircraft arrives at the gate position and departs from the gate using thrust of its engines to maneuver. Figure 6-19 shows the individual areas in separate diagrams labeled a through f.
Figure 6-19a shows the area required for minimum safe clearance for maneuvering; Figure 6-19b shows the area required for minimum safe clearance to other aircraft. These are much greater than those of the previous example (Figure 6-15a and b). The area for minimum safe clearance to buildings or other obstructions is shown in Figure 6-19c; that is, the area to the left of the wingtip. This is the result of the area that would be produced by the aircraft when maneuvering parallel to the building; in this case, it is the extent of the length of the rectangular area snown. For stretched aircraft, the sweep of the tail may determine the distance at which the aircraft is parked from the building. Figure 6-19d shows the area for passenger movement on the apron; that is, the area projecting directly to the forward aircraft door from the building

6-19

6-20
I
Figure 6-13 Aircraft Sill Heights.

AREA REQUIRED FOR MANEUVERING AIRCRAFT
AREA FOR MINIMUM SAFE CLEARANCE TO OTHER AIRCRAFT
AREA FOR MINIMUM SAFE CLEARANCE TO BUILDINGS
AREA REQUIRED FOR PASSENGER MOVEMENT ON THE APRON
AREA FOR AIRCRAFT SERVICE EQUIPMENT
AREA TO MINIMIZE JET BLAST EFFECT AREA OCCUPIED BY THE AIRCRAFT
Figure 6-14 Aircraft Gate Position Composite Area Diagram (DC-10, L-1011)
6-21

6-22

la
L
L
L
L
Figure 6-16 Ground-Service Equipment Layout (DC-10)
6-23

j
1
i
I
I
Figure 6-18 Aircraft Gate Position Composite Area
AREA REQUIRED FOR M AN EUVERI N G Al RCRAFT
AREA FOR MINIMUM SAFE CLEARANCE TO OTHER AIRCRAFT
AREA FOR MINIMUM SAFE CLEARANCE TO BUILDINGS
AREA REQUIRED FOR PASSENGER MOVEMENT ON THE APRON
AREA FOR AIRCRAFT SERVICE EQUIPMENT
AREA TO MINIMI 2E JET BLAST EFFECT
AREA OCCUPIEO BY THE AIRCRAFT
Diagram (B-727)
6-25

6.5 ADJACENCY RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MAJOR FUNCTIONAL AREAS
Figure 6-25 depicts the main functional areas of a typical terminal from curb to airfield in terms of sequence of flow. For simplicity, only two relationships are used in the diagram, symbolized as follows:
Essential - --------------
Recommended-------------------
Primary terminal areas are identified by shaded boxes, whereas secondary areas are shown as open boxes.Therelationships, although graphically shown in a planar form, apply to both single- and multilevel terminal plans.
Figure 6-25 does not imply that every terminal should have provisions for all of these functions or that all of these functions should have individually defined spaces for low-volume traffic. One general space may suffice for multiple functions, such as lobby, ticket counter, and departure lounge. In these cases, airline personnel often have multiple functions to perform.
These functional adjacencies are listed in greater detail, but without sequence, in Figure 6-26. Relationships between areas in the matrix are described as Essential, Desirable, and Nonessential.
6.6 DECENTRALIZATION OF MAJOR FUNCTIONAL AREAS
Each of the .main functional elements of the apron-terminal complexdeparture lounge areas, bag claim, etc-.which have been described in this chapter appears in varying degrees of complexity in each of the four basic concepts. The specific type and volume of traffic are the prime determinants for the size of the apron-terminal complex, and will be determining factors in the requirement for each type of functional area and in the degree to which the function is centralized.
To evaluate the significant characteristics of a decentralized plan, the term decentralization needs to be clarified. Decentralization of the apron-terminal complex will take place (1) when aircraft are parked in a single line adjacent to the terminal and (2) when
the major functional areas are individually divided and located in direct relationship to each aircraft gate. The efficiency and economics in terms of total building area, manpower, and passenger convenience must be extensively analyzed before a decision can be made.
In this context, it should be noted that, in the case of a small terminalthree to six gates, for examplethe aircraft are usually parked in a single line at the terminal. However, the major activities are usually combined in a few basic functional areas. As a general premise, centralized areas may be said to serve four, six, eight, or more aircraft gate positions; decentralized areas serve one, two, or sometimes four aircraft gate positions
6.6.1 WALKING DISTANCES
Fully decentralized concepts must be carefully analyzed. A passenger may return to the same airport at a gate distant from his original departure gate. Because of this, total curb-to-gate walking distance may be equal to or more than the other concepts. Maximum interline connecting distance for the same number of aircraft in the linear concept may be almost double that of the pier or satellite (see Chapter 8). Long interline connecting distances are inherent for large numbers of aircraft in the linear concept, whereas they may not be as critical in the pier or satellite concept, depending upon the actual design.
6.6.2 MANPOWER
Operational costs associated with manpower and equipment tend to increase proportionally with an increase in decentralization of the functional areas. For example, a single bag-claim area and a single outbound area serving eight gates will require less manpower and equipment than three or four separate baggage areas serving the same number of aircraft..
6.6.3 CURB AVAILABILITY
A fully decentralized linear concept may produce short curb-to-gate walking distances and more available curb.
6.6.4 FUNCTIONAL AREAS
In the purest form, a fully decentralized concept will have ticketing, departure lounges, and baggage facilities for every one or two aircraft gate positions.
6-31

I
In practice, some form of centralization may be applied by individual airlines in adapting their needs to the concept. Figure 6-27 illustrates how the similarities between the pier and linear concepts be-^ come apparent as a measure of centralization. As the linear concept progresses, its holdroom, ticketing, baggage claim, and other major functional areas change from fully decentralized to centralized. The fully centralized linear concept is identical in many respects to a centralized pier concept serving the same number of aircraft. By rotating the linear "piers" through a 90-degree arc, a full pier concept is achieved.
6.7 TECHNOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENTS
Of the many technological improvements, two will be described herein: automated baggage systems and people-moving systems.
6.7.1 AUTOMATED BAGGAGE SYSTEMS
To minimize flight close-out time at baggage checkin and passenger waiting time at claim, baggage from check-in to aircraft and from aircraft to claim should be equal to or less than the corresponding passenger travel time. The average passenger walking speed is 242 feet per minute. Exposure of the passenger to restrooms, public telephones, moving sidewalks or stairs, U-drive operators, and concessions along his route is variable, and may slow his travel time between two points. Automated baggage systems, utilizing destination-coded vehicles to the make-up or baggage-claim area, may improve upon the efficiency of operations.
Variations in the application of automated baggage systems may involve only outbound, inbound, interline, or some combination of these. Such systems have specific advantages for large-volume operations, and can often be expanded on a modular basis. However, any automated system may be justifiable only at high-volume stations because of their high initial investment. The final decision to install such systems can be made only after comparing the capital, operating, and maintenance costs to those of other systems.
6.7.2 PEOPLE-MOVING SYSTEMS
The increasing use of wide-body aircraft and the steady, long-term upswing of traffic volumes have resulted in a need for larger terminals. More expansive facilities, in turn, have caused walking distance
within the terminal to increase. The need for what is often referred to as "people-moving systems" has grown rapidly in recent years. A brief discussion to define the term people-moving" appears necessary before using this term further. People-moving systems are basically pedestrian-oriented, microtransportation systems conceived to alleviate pedestrian circulation problems in specific areas. These areas can be central business districts, shopping centers, air-passenger terminals, and others. The areas are generally less than three to four miles in length and cover less than 1.5 square miles. In brief, they provide short-haul collection and distribution of passengers. They- can range from automated walkways and escalators to minibus systems, rail, or even sophisticated air-cushion train systems. These systems can be used singly or in combination.
The use of various people-moving systems has been adopted in recent terminal-expansion programs to avoid the long walking distances inherent in some terminal designs. It is evident that the continued growth of air traffic will place additional emphasis upon the need to move people effectively through the terminal, and that the capabilities of many existing systems are inadequate to accommodate forecast requirements. Two factors come into play in any people-moving system: (1) the elapsed time required to travel the distance in question and (2) the personal effort required to cover the distance. Generally speaking, when the distance to be traveled is less than 2,000 feet, the consideration of effort is more important than that of the time factor. Many airport people-moving systems require more travelling time on the part of the passenger than if he had walked. The effort required, however, is substantially less when using the available mechanical means; the fact that the total elapsed time increases slightly is secondary in importance to passenger comfort.
As the travel distances increase beyond 2,000 feet, the limit of maximum practical walking distance is exceeded, and the elapsed time to travel the distance takes on a greater significance. As a general desired goal, when walking distance between the point of check-in and the point at which the passenger boards his aircraft exceeds 1,000 feet, consideration should be given to providing a mechanical people-moving system.
Single- and double-lane moving walkways have been found to be useful for distances of 400 to 500 feet. A series of moving walk units may be used
6-32

APPENDIX A
SIMULATION TECHNIQUES, METHODOLOGY, AND
APPLICATIONS
.ppendix provides guidance to the planner or f\manager in the use of operations research -ques as a means of evaluating an apron-ter-I design. In particular, apron-terminal simula-[s discussed in terms of the following:
Areas of application
The nature of operations research
Basic steps in simulation model development
(2) How would a change in aircraft parking from parallel/taxi-out to nose-in/push-out affect the flow of aircraft on the apron?
j(3) What level of baggage-delivery service will be provided by a particular baggage-handling scheme?
(4) Which staging of ground equipment, in relation to apron-gate configuration, will result in the least amount of interference on the apron?
'{4) Examples of apron-terminal simulation studies
(appendix concludes with recommendations to banner on the use of simulation.
AREAS OF APPLICATION
, 5 questions that can be answered with the help {Simulation or other operations research tech-is are the following:
|0) What is the aggregate taxiing time associated with a specific apron/gate/taxiway design, as compared with some alternative?
^ 12) How many baggage-claim devices are needed in a joint-use facility?
1(3)
How should lobby space, concourses, curb frontage, automobile parking, and other public areas be sized and allocated to accommodate projected passenger volumes?
:
) How many transporters, docks, and remote gates will be required to handle a projected flight schedule?
r questions frequently analyzed through simu-!n studies include:
) What is the minimum number of check-in/ ticketing positions required to ensure that passenger delays are reasonable?
(5) How would a current or future flight schedule be changed so as to result in better facilities utilization?
A.2 THE NATURE OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH
The increasing cost of facilities, manpower, and ground equipment makes it most important to be as accurate as possible in sizing and designing apron-terminal facilities. This can be done only by improving the quantification of requirements, and it is here that operations research plays an increasingly important role.
Fortunately, the parameters governing the apron-terminal systemaircraft taxiing speeds, passenger walking speeds, enplaning and deplaning rates, arrival patterns at holdrooms, vehicle occupancy times at the curb, etc.remain remarkably constant, regardless of time and location. This gives the quantification process real meaning. It makes it possible to project apron-terminal activities into the future in terms of these parameters, and to determine the requirements that will fulfill planning objectives satisfactorily.
Operations research, as applied to facilities planning, refers to the systematic application of quantitative analysis to the planning process, with the objective of realizing the most cost-effective apron-terminal design. It is when the application of common sense, rules of thumb, and simple economics becomes inadequate to solve the problem at hand that the use of operations research should be considered.
A-1

[
^ techniques of operations research are most seful when (1) the objectives of the study can be jantified in terms of some specific operational re-jlt; (2) the complexity of operations is such that [-e effects of a change in one part of the apron-ter-linal system on other parts cannot be determined ithout extensive analysis; and (3) an abstract
(stodel or representation of apron-terminal opera-ons can be formulated. Such a representation may ke the form of a set of mathematical relationships ...mathematical model) or of a computer program [(computer model).
perations research techniques may be consjd-[*ed as falling into two categoriesmathematical malysis and simulation.
*.2.1 MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS
irts of the apron-terminal system that do not in-Ive complex interactions with other parts of the Eastern may sometimes be represented by means a mathematical model. The "solution of the )del will indicate an optimum course of action.
fueuing theory is one analytical technique that has ten used with some success in solving airport fatties design problems. However, the complexity 'the apron-terminal operations frequently rules ut its application.
2.2 SIMULATION
hen mathematical analysis is impracticable or in-[sible, it may still be possible to obtain a solution 'simulating specific operations of the apron-ter-pal complex. Simulation, as used here, refers to 'abstract representation of a series of interrelat-1 events in the apron-terminal system.
Ien the number of events is not too great and 'nteractions are not too complex, the simulation % be run manually on paper or even with tem-tes. in the manner of a game. This approach is "'y understood, and is useful for demonstrating Elation results.
en the number of events is great and interactions *een events are complex, as is often the case, simulation must be run on a computer. However, ause computer simulation can be relatively ex-s've to develop and run, it should be used only cases not amenable to other techniques.
u|ation makes it possible to perform experiments arT>odel of the apron-terminal system rather than
on the actual system itself, and to examine proposed designs when testing of the actual system would not be feasible. Simulation provides a tool for testing apron-terminal designs before any commitments are made, and to compare the effectiveness of both current and proposed designs on a quantitative basis.
It is the responsibility of the planner to submit his designs for evaluation and comparison. The computer model functions in the same manner as a wind tunnel used by aeronautical engineers to test and improve their designs until the desired performance is reached. Improvement of a design requires an on-going interaction between the planner and the simulation model. As with the wind tunnel, it may require many trials before the planner reaches a satisfactory design.
A.3 BASIC STEPS IN SIMULATION MODEL DEVELOPMENT
When simulation has been selected as the appropriate method of analysis, the following steps must be taken in developing a new model:
(1) Define the scope of simulation. What are the questions to be answered? Which parts of the apron-terminal operation are to be included in the model? Which are to be excluded? At what level of detail will the model be developed?
(2) Specify the required output. Usually, answers to the original questions can only be obtained indirectly through interpretation of the model output. For example, the sizing of concourses must be derived from an examination of expected concourse populations.
(3) Structure the model. The questions that the simulation is designed to answer dictate a model structure. This translation of study objectives into model structure requires considerable skill on the part of the model designer. Structuring the model calls for an abstract representation of apron-terminal facilities, and also of events, such as aircraft. passenger, or baggage flows and their logical interactions. A flow chart of the simulation model serves as a useful means of communication between the model designer and the planner.
A-2

Define the required input. The extent to which data may be obtained influences problem definition and structuring of the model. Variations in system parameters must also be specified to simulate alternative apron-terminal configurations and procedures.
Once the model has been developed, it must be verified. This requires test runs to check that the model.gives logically correct results. That is not enough, however, as such results may not be realistic Therefore, the model must be validated further. This requires comparison of simulation model output with known operating results to check that the model yields factually correct and realistic results. Only then is it possible to have faith in the model as a predictive tool.
Implementation of the model requires the establishment of procedures for collecting the necessary data, running the simulation on a computer, presenting and interpreting the output, comparing the simulation results with the planning objectives, and modifying the original facilities design in the light of these results.
Follow-up involves post-appraisal of the usefulness of the simulation model, routine model maintenance, and possible redesign of the model to reflect changing apron-terminal conditions or the planner's need for new output.
'4 EXAMPLES OF APRON-TERMINAL SIMULATION
blowing are brief examples of the purpose, output, Put, and design of three typical apron-terminal
emulations:
(1) Taxi-Flow Simulation
and taxi-out delays. Utilization of designated holding areas by aircraft waiting for gates.
Input: Design flight schedule (arrival and departure times, aircraft types):
Aircraft arrival delay distribution
Aircraft ground service times
Aircraft push-out or power-out times
Taxiing distances
Taxiing speeds in apron area
Others
Parameters that may be varied include apron geometry, dual or single taxilane, aircraft maneuvering time at gate, length of time arriving flights would wait for preferred gates, etc.
Model Design: The model incorporates the logic governing all aircraft movements on the apron and choice of taxiing paths, gates, and holding areas. It excludes from consideration other ramp activities, such as ground-vehicle traffic and ground-support operations.
(2) Passenger Flow Simulation
Purpose: Determine corridor widths and the size of baggage-claim areas.
Output: Plot of populations in corridors and baggage-claim areas, and of people flow rates at designated corridor cross sections, by time of day.
Input: Design flight schedule:
Passengers on and off
Purpose: Evaluate alternative plans in terms of delays to arriving and departing aircraft, and possibly in terms of the number of holding positions required to handle arriving aircraft unable to obtain gates.
Output: Frequency distribution of taxi-in
Visitors' ratios
Passengers' and greeters' arrival patterns
Walking speeds
Passenger deplaning rates

Baggage ratios Others
irameters to be varied include the as-..gnrnent of flights to gates, the assignment of baggage-claim areas to flights, rid baggage-delivery times.
Model Design: The model incorporates -e logic governing all passenger move-
ents between aircraft and baggage-uaim areas, and those between ticket counters and aircraft. It excludes from consideration passenger check-in and ticketing.
ggage Flow Simulation
Purpose: Determine the most economical type of outbound and transfer baggage system to handle projected volumes.
Output: The number and flow rate of originating, interline, and intraline transfer baggage into the make-up area, broken down by destination.
Input: Design flight schedule:
Passenger volumes
Passenger arrival distribution
Baggage ratios per passenger-originating and transfer
Curbside-to-ticket counter check-in ratio
Baggage travel times or distances to make-up area
Number of possible destinations Others
Parameters to be varied pertain to sorting equipment characteristics and make-up area configuration.
Model Design: The model incorporates the logic governing the flow of baggage
from curbside and ticket counters to make-up area, as well as the baggagesorting process. It does not consider baggage delivery to inbound passengers.
A.5 RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PLANNER
Computer simulation is a powerful planning tool. To obtain the best results from it, sound guiding principles should be followed. These are described in the paragraphs that follow.
Participation of the planner in the definition and design of the simulation is essential if the model is to be relevant and if the conclusions derived from it are to be acceptable. The planner need not concern himself with the technical aspects of simulation modeling; however, he should maintain control over model design, and clearly understand the assumptions, capabilities, and limitations of his model.
Close collaboration between the airport staff, airport consultant, and the airlines is essential if the simulation is to be realistic. The model designer should endeavor to become thoroughly familiar with airline and airport operations and practices, and keenly aware of the interaction between apron-terminal facilities design and airline scheduling. Lack of understanding of airline operations may result in an unrealistic or irrelevant model.
The simulation model must be tailored to the planners needs, not vice versa. This does not preclude the use of a general-purpose model when available, the adaptation of a model originally developed for a different airport. Existing models available from consultants should be independently and impartially evaluated before adoption.
The best use of simulation is for comparing alternative facility designs, rather than for evaluating a single design.
A model is only as good as the data it uses. Inaccurate data or data of poor quality can invalidate the output of the most carefully designed model. Only when the planner is assured of both the validity of his model and the accuracy of his data can he be confident of the soundness of the output. It may be worth devoting more effort to screening and improving the data than to refining the model itself.
A-4

5 a user of simulation or purchaser of simulation vices, the planner should also observe some arnings. The paragraphs that-follow describe a !jciber of these.
^ny claim that a model can simulate the entire pron-terminal system must be greeted with skep-cism. It is better to have a collection of relatively odest, more manageable models, each of which ertains to one aspect of apron-terminal operations. Nhen such models are compatible in the sense that tie output of the model becomes an input to another, this is called the "modular approach." It gives 'lie planner the flexibility of modeling only that part of the apron-terminal complex that is of current interest to him.
[Claims that an apron-terminal model is "modular" [should, however, be taken with caution. A collection of models covering various facets of the apron-terminal operation do not add up to a modular model. A model development master plan is required to ensure that all submodels are mutually compatible and complement one another.
The capabilities of a simulation model sometimes tend to be overestimated. Improvements that could be made to the model are sometimes described as if they already existed.
Claims that "the model has been validated" often mean no more than that it has been verified. Few simulation models in existence are truly battle-tested, validated, and robust (i.e., they do not "hang up" because of unusual conditions or defective input). The requirements of robustness and validation require a great deal of effort, time, and cost beyond those required for basic model development. Initial time and cost estimates often fail to make allowances for this.
Every model may be criticized on the ground that it leaves out this or that feature of the apron-terminal operation. This does not necessarily invalidate a model, as long as its results are not overly sensitive to factors that have been left out.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chamberlain, I., and Micka, S., "Simulation of a Major Airline Terminal, Proc. Second Annual Simulation Symposium, 1969.
Eilon, S., and Mathewson, S., "A Simulation Study for the Design of an Air Terminal Building," Proc. Winter Simulation Conference, 1971.
Lee, A. M., Applied Queuing Theory, St. Martins Press, New York, 1966.
Klingen, L.G., "A Dynamic Simulation Approach Solves Problems in Facilities Planning and Adds a New Dimension to Conventional Cost Analysis," Proc. AGIFORS, Vol. 11, 1971.
Mountjoy, K., "Airport Simulation Models," Proc. AGIFORS, Vol. 9, 1969.
Nanda, R., Browne, J. J., and Lui, R., "Simulating Passenger Arrivals at Airports," Industrial Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 3, March 1972.
Porter, J. W "System Simulation," in H. B. Maynard, Ed., Industrial Engineer Handbook, 2nd Edition, | McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965
Seeman, R. E., "Simulation in Airport Facilities Design: Lounge Planning Model," Proc. Fourth Conference on Applications of Simulation, 1970.
A-5

APPENDIX B
GRAPHIC MODEL METHOD FOR DIAGRAMMING THE APRON-TERMINAL COMPLEX
The method of diagramming the apron-terminal complex described herein is another way of building models to simulate real circumstances. The value of modeling the circumstances of the apron-terminal complex is implicit in the benefits derived from developing various arrangements and variations before a decision is made to select the most appropriate concept solution.
When modifications to existing facilities are being considered, the diagramming method of modeling the modifications should be attempted. The existing facility graphic model is developed, and the graphic model of the modification is superimposed over that of the existing facility. The combined graphic model can then be considered in terms of what is to be expected from the proposed modification. A secondary benefit derived from the graphic model method is that the inventory can be maintained for further development of the model, as well as subsequent modifications or improvements that may be contemplated.
Once a broad definition of the apron-terminal node has been developed, a more precise definitionand, ultimately, a complete inventoryof the requirements .of the actual facility can be determined. The abstract terms of reference will be defined and related to some typical examples of terminal components or elements known to be in use today. From these examples, it will be possible to arrange and rearrange the various parts of the apron-terminal complex to suit the planner's needs with respect to the particular configuration of existing or new concepts of the apron-terminal complex.
The apron-terminal node is the point of concentration of activity situated between two primary feed-er/distribution networks. The relationship of these two networks to the apron-terminal node can be expressed as shown in Figure B-1. Although it is beyond the scope of this analysis, it is necessary to recognize that these networks will affect the apron-terminal node. The magnitude and characteristics of the activity generated by the networks will determine the sequence, configuration, and arrangement of the apron-terminal node and its various parts.
The apron-terminal node can be further abstracted into subnodes, describing four distinct points of activity as illustrated in Figure B-2. Within the four subnodes, a flow of passengers and baggage, inbound and outbound (arriving and departing), can be shown as in Figure B-3.
Within the subnodes of the apron-terminal node, elements of the subnodes can be defined as activity centers related to accommodating the inbound and outbound movement of passengers, visitors, baggage, ground vehicles, and aircraft. The elements are shown as compartments of the subnode; round and diamond-shaped symbols indicate events and decision points, respectively.
The events serve as identifying points for descriptions of activity and instructions for determining the characteristic and magnitude of the event. The event basically asks a question related to the activity taking place in the element.
The decision points serve as identifying points for descriptions of essential information that needs to be transmitted to the passenger so that he can make clear decisions, thus facilitating flow and avoiding confusion. This information may be in the form of graphics or signs. It may also suggest that the configuration in plan should be arranged to provide simplicity in the flow of passengers. The decision point will probably be at the juncture of the subnodes; for example, the point at which the connector joins the terminal.
Location of the events on the flow lines serves another purpose. For example, a measurement taken at the aircraft door will produce a particular rate of flow, whereas the device used to deplane the passengers will produce another. Therefore, before the rate of flow can be established, each preceding event must be examined specifically for the effect it will have. It is necessary, then, to synthesize the information taken at each preceding element, event, and decision point, with respect to direction of flow, to determine the rate of flow at any given point. As an item, the event then serves as a section indication of the point at which the flow ideally could be
B-1

jred. Figure B-4 summarizes and will familiar-reader with symbols and terms that appear times. The major elements used in the dia-> are as follows:
Apron element: An aircraft gate position with all of the events pertaining to the operation of the aircraft position.
Boarding element: The device used to deplane and enplane passengers.
Waiting/boarding element: The area used for receiving passengers for a flight departure.
(4) Outbound baggage element: The area for receiving baggage for processing and delivery to the aircraft position for a flight.
(5) Inbound baggage element: The area for receiving baggage from the aircraft position for an arriving flight and displaying baggage for claim by the passenger.
(6) Airline ticket counter/office element: The area for receiving passengers prior to proceeding to the waiting/boarding element for processing.
SYMBOL TERM
--------- PASSENGER FLOW: SHOWS THE MAIN ROUTE OF THE PASSENGER.
BAGGAGE FLOW: SHOWS THE MAIN BAGGAGE TRANSFER ROUTES.
--------
V-------->
SUBNODE: THE APRON-TERMINAL AREA IS DIVIDED INTO FOUR SUBNODES.
ELEMENT: DESCRIBES THE AREA OR SUBJECT.
EVENT: DESCRIBES AND SUGGESTS SPECIFIC INFORMATION TO BE OBTAINED.
0
DECISION POINT: DESCRIBES ESSENTIAL INFORMATION REQUIRED BY THE PASSENGER AT KEY POINTS IN THE TERMINAL.
Figure B-4 Symbols and Terms
B-3

(7) Terminal services element: The area for receiving passengers and visitors providing essential services and amenities in support of and related to the travelers needs.
(8) Curb element (inbound and outbound): The area for entering or exiting the apron-terminal system via ground transportation, subject to the trends in preferences for various vehicle modes.
figures B-5 and B-6 show the complete diagrams for the outbound and inbound passengers with bag-|age using an example of a typical apron-terminal irrangement currently in use. The subnodes, ele-
me~s. events, and decision points are numbered anc k= ed to a list following each (Tables B-1 and B-Z viding correspondingly numbered and sequence-- descriptions and instructions. The de-scrcx's given are examples only. A specific apr----erminal arrangement may produce a similar list;-; th slight variances, depending upon the specrfc circumstance. The inbound and outbound flows ire shown separately. This is done because sim-te~eously depicted flows may cause undue comoications in the interpretation of the information -c.sever, it is possible to combine inbound and outbo_*d flows, and some examples are given here ~

TABLE B-1. OUTBOUND PASSENGER EVENT DESCRIPTION
1 CURB SUBNODE
1.1 OUTBOUND BAGGAGE ELEMENT
111 Area lor receiving baggage from the outbound (departing) passenger lor processing by the airline May Include a mechanical device to transfer baggage to the outbound baggage element In the terminal subnode
1.2 OUTBOUND BAGGAGE EVENT
1 2 1 Receive baggage for processing from the outbound passenger as he arrives at the curb All baggage received is processed for a specific flight by the airline representative at the baggage check-m station Transfer of baggage to the outbound area is accomplished by a mechanical device, or manually if the outbound area for baggage is in close proximity to the curb subnode
1.3 CURB ELEMENT
131 Area for queuing ground-transportation vehicles for the outbound (departing) passengers and visitors
1.4 PERSONAL VEHICLE PREFERENCE EVENT
1 4 1 Determine the number of passengers and visitors prefer-
ring the personal vehicle as the mode for entering the apron-terminal system
1.5 BUS (MOTOR COACH) OR LIMOUSINE PREFERENCE EVENT
1.5.1 Determine the number of passengers and visitors preferring the bus or limousine as the mode for entering the apron-terminal system Determine the location of a drop-off area for the vehicle(s) as dimensional characteristics and longer dwell time required for offloading passengers may suggest a specific area to maintain efficient flow at the curb
1.6 TAXI PREFERENCE EVENT
16 1 Determine the number of passengers and visitors preferring the taxi as the mode for entering the apron-terminal system
2 TERMINAL SUBNODE
2.1 OUTBOUND BAGGAGE ELEMENT
2.1.1 Area for processing baggage for transfer to the aircraft. This area is a central receiving point for processing of baggage for specific flights, receiving baggage from the airport ticket office element, the curb outbound baggage element, and the interline baggage element (not shown) Baggage is sorted, usually from a mechanical device (conveyor). and loaded into containers or carts for transfer to a specific flight
2.2 OUTBOUND BAGGAGE EVENT
2 2 1 Determine the quantity of baggage to be collected sorted, and processed The number of flights and attendant containers and carts, and the specific characteristic of the flight (turnaround or through), will determine the area for staging of containers and carts for baggage transfer to the aircraft
2.3 AIRLINE TICKET OFFICE ELEMENT
2 3 1 Area for processing passengers and baggage for a specific flight, including airline ticket processing, baggage processing. flight-schedule information, flight reservations, and personal services Baggage is received, tagged tor a specific flight and transferred to the outbound baggage element, usually located in the terminal subnode in close proximity to the airline ticket office element
2.4 AIRLINE TICKET OFFICE EVENT
2 4 1 Determine the number of passengers and visitors that will require use of the airline ticket office Determine the quantity of baggage that will be processed from an analysis of trends at the specific airport based on the ratio of passengers to baggage Some baggage will be processed at the outbound baggage element at the curb Determine the number ot ticket counter positions required to accommodate the passengers within a reasonable time framework based on minimal delays encountered during the busiest time for the ticket counter Specific characteristics of the
flight service for the particular airport may determine the processing time in general
2.5 DECISION POINT-TERMINAL
2.5.1 Determine whether to proceed to the airline ticket office element or the terminal services element. Information required and/or a separation of functions required to maintain efficient flow
2.6 TERMINAL EVENT
2 6 1 Determine volumes of passengers and visitors.
2 6 2 Determine volumes of passengers and visitors going directly to the waiting boarding element,
2.7 DECISION POINT-TERMINAL
2.7.1 Provide information for passengers and visitors, including flight schedule information and location of waiting/board-ing elements
2.8 TERMINAL SERVICES ELEMENT
2 8 1 Area for passengers and visitors, providing essential ser-
vices and amenities This area may include, but is not necessarily limited to: restrooms: restaurant, information services; concessionaire space for newspapers, magazines and gifts, bar; banks; medical and first-aid facilities, and waiting areas for passengers and visitors
2.9 TERMINAL SERVICES EVENT
2.9.1 Determine the number of passengers and visitors that will require use of the essential facilities and areas Determine public areas for visitors waiting for arriving flights Determine locations for concessions that will afford exposure to customers while remaining clear of essential circulation traffic.
3 TERMINAL CONNECTOR SUBNODE
3.1 WAITING/BOARDING ELEMENT
3 1 1 Area for final ticketing process, issuance of boarding pass, and waiting for boarding Facilities are also provided for baggage transfer to apron via outbound baggage flow
3.2 WAITING BOARDING EVENT
3.2.1 Determine the number of passengers and visitors to be accommodated in the waiting/boarding element. Determine the rate at which the passenger arrives at the final ticketing process area over a given period of time prior to the scheduled departure time
3.3 DECISION POINT-TERMINAL CONNECTOR
3.3.1 Check final boarding pass for correct information.
3 3 2 Make final security check prior to boarding
3.4 AIRCRAFT BOARDING ELEMENT
3 4 1 Type or mode of passenger boarding device and clearances required for passengers and loading device.
3.5 AIRCRAFT BOARDING EVENT
3 5 1 Rate of flow of passengers enplaning (depends on loading device used by airline).
3.6 APRON SERVICES ELEMENT
3 6 1 Area for apron personnel, aircraft service equipment and storage
3 6 2 Area for airline flight personnel and flight crew facilities
and flight operations facilities
3.7 APRON SERVICES EVENT
3.7.1 Location proximity to apron aircraft position
4 APRON SUBNODE ,
4.1 APRON ELEMENT
4 11 Aircraft parked position.
4.1.2 Area for aircraft ground service.
4 13 Area for aircraft cabin service.
4.1.4 Area for aircraft baggage loading and offloading.
4.2 BAGGAGE LOADING AND OFFLOADING EVENT
4 2.1 Rate of flow (containers; LD-3 or B-707 type, or "free loaded"without containers) or air cargo and baggage
4.3 AIRCRAFT/APRON SERVICE EVENT
4 3 1 Timing and sequence of aircraft service; through or turnaround flight.
0
B-5